An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be paid subsidies for farming the new variety of millet. Since millet is already a staple food in Tagus, people will readily adopt the new variety. To combat vitamin A deficiency, the government of Tagus should do everything it can to promote this new type of millet.
The argument states that the people in the impoverished nation of Tagus suffer from the deficiency of vitamin A. In response to it, an international development organization has engineered a new breed of millet which is high in vitamin A. Being costly, farmers will be provided subsidies for farming this new variety. The argument also states that millet being a staple food in Tangus, people will adopt the new variety readily.
The step taken by the international development organization in eradicating the deficiency of vitamin A among the people of Tangus is a quite good initiative. Since they have engineered the food item which already happens to be the staple food of the residents of Tangus, so it is likely that people will adopt it without any hesitation. Also, despite being costly, farmers will farm this new variety as they will be provided subsidies.
However certain flaws seems to be there in the argument. The advantages mentioned in it, regarding the use of new variety of millet, are merely based on assumptions. There is no solid proof for them. Let us analyse them one by one.
Firstly it mentions that the cost of the new variety of seeds is more and farmers will be provided subsidies for farming it. there is no surety that farmers will continue to get subsidies from the government. In this case farmers will eventually discontinue using the new variety.
Secondly it is being stated that millet is already a staple food in Tangus, we have no confirmation that people will start consuming this new variety owing to the fact that it might be having a different taste, not palatable to the people of Tangus.
Lastly, there is no experimental survey conducted anywhere which could validate the fact that there is no harm in consuming the newly engineered breed of millet.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not exactly. better to say: maybe the subsides are less than the cost.
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- not OK. need to argue:
To combat vitamin A deficiency, the government of Tagus should do everything it can to promote this new type of millet.
----------------
flaws:
the introduction is too long. one paragraph is enough.
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 13 15
No. of Words: 305 350
No. of Characters: 1461 1500
No. of Different Words: 136 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.179 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.79 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.664 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 105 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 73 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 46 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 34 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.462 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.943 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.615 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.373 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.676 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.128 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...le will adopt the new variety readily. The step taken by the international develop...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, regarding, second, secondly, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 1.0 11.1786427146 9% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 28.8173652695 94% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 55.5748502994 70% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1498.0 2260.96107784 66% => OK
No of words: 305.0 441.139720559 69% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.91147540984 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17902490978 4.56307096286 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72090457159 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 204.123752495 70% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.465573770492 0.468620217663 99% => OK
syllable_count: 482.4 705.55239521 68% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 54.6402653155 57.8364921388 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.625 119.503703932 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0625 23.324526521 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.625 5.70786347227 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.463903119922 0.218282227539 213% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.155116386312 0.0743258471296 209% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.107813424851 0.0701772020484 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.231292026941 0.128457276422 180% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.152987659109 0.0628817314937 243% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.2 14.3799401198 78% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.3550499002 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.2 12.5979740519 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.94 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 98.500998004 66% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.